New Super League scoring system - Part 2

[Graham Humphrey]

1. 15,12,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 - Fixed maximum 12 positions (current)

2. 25,22,20,19,18,17,16,15,14,13,12,11,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 - Fixed maximum 22 positions

3. 15,12,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 - 12 or less competitors
(16,13,11,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 - 13 competitors
17,14,12,11,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 - 14 competitors)
- Dynamic, each positions points increase by 1 point for every competitor over 12.

4. 50, 40, 35, 30, 25, 20, 15, 12, 11,10,5,5,5.. + 50*(your_score/best_score). Combination Fixed/Proportional (lemon64)

5. Dynamic as per option 3 above + number_of_competitors*(your_score/best_score) Combination Dynamic/Proportional

[Graham Humphrey]

Big thanks to Mike for working all this out, he has a better grasp of this sort of thing than I do I think!

Harry's proposal was left out as we felt it was a little complicated although interesting.

Any tweaks/change suggestions still welcome of course.

Lemon thread is here - http://www.lemonamiga.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11507

[capehorn]

None of these proposed systems are awful, I could certainly happily continue playing under all of them. Here are my thoughts.

Current scoring system is perfectly fine. I believe this discussion all began because people who knew they weren't going to finish in the top 12 weren't bother to post their scores? Well 2 and 3 are both ok, I'd prefer 3 because I don't like the idea of us offering points down to 22nd place and only getting 13 or so competitors in certain rounds, I think that would be a bit of an embarrassing situation.

4 has merits but I worry that it would over-reward people who just happen to be brilliant at a certain game (this round would have been ridiculous http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=58811 ). The entire season could swing on a single round, and voting for the next round could become very tactical. Option 5 is better because it does reward performance somewhat without over-doing it.

I'll vote for 3, although really I'm voting against 2 and 4 because I feel they are the weakest. One thing I should point out is that you allow the possibility of cheating/corruption with options 3 and 5. If someone scores well themselves and a close competitor doesn't post a score, they could inflate their score by registering dummy accounts and posting low scores. I don't think this would ever happen, but it's worth bring it up while we are discussing this. The other thing I'd say is that the current scoring system isn't really broken, it works fine. If we can't get concensus on what system we should use next season, maybe we ought to stick with what we've got?

[lifeschool]

Originally Posted by capehorn

Option 5 is better

I went for option 5 because it doesnt reward runaway mega high scores and makes catching up impossible like option 4 might do, and honors finishing positions and participants.

I dont like option 4 because e.g. if Seb Vettel won a race by 5 whole laps over 2nd position, its not fair that 2nd place should be penalised in points just for trying just as hard in the race. Option #4 is open to milking abuse too.

[Harry]

I think that there might be much more attraction to certain games with points rewarded for taking part. I have attached a table of scores for Pinball Dreams played in the knockout qualifying of 2011, and I think it shows a great gap between very popular games like this and games like Dogs of War, where not even readily available points with the current scoring system could convince more people to take part.
I personally think that such a gap with 2.5 times as much points is too great, as we all have certain weaknesses in some games. (Thus my normalized proposal, but thats another story now.)
I think ill go with vote 4 then.

[leathered]

Whilst I'm not such a great competitor here I've been following this discussion with interest and find myself more likely to compete if the points represented taking part without adversely affecting the stronger competitors points. Currently if I have a score and it's in the points I debate whether to post and be counted against holding back those that play more often and have more of a league standing.
I think the current ethos of 'dib in and out' is great although I'm not sure that it is best reflected in the points system as it stands. Something that involves us lesser players whilst keeping the high end competitor spirit would offer the best of both worlds; it would encourage more competitors whilst keeping the focus on high scores by the best.
Just my thoughts, I'm not confident enough to vote as yet. Of course I'll still play whatever the points system, it's still gaming on the Amiga, and always feels awesome to go head to head, discovering new games I'd probably turn a blind eye to =)